¶1304. NECESSITY OF REVELATION. XTIAN RELIGION. The religion [c's line?] that is required of us consists in the disposition & affections of mind <which [c]> we ought to have towards God, and our behaviour with respect to him.
¶Therefore in order to know what is that religion that becomes us we must know, that God is, & what manner of being he is; what perfections he has, and what concern we have with him; or what notice he takes of us; what relation we stand in to him, & what dependence we have upon him. next col. b.
_________________________________________________________________
< next p. . d.> And therefore <if [c]>it be a matter of great necessity or importance, that we should have & exercise that religion that becomes us; tis necessary er <&> [xo and & by c??] of great importance, that we should have clear [meant to be xo?] notice of God's being & perfections, & <of[c]> our concern with him; or such manifestations & evidences of his being & perfections, & <of[c]> the notice he takes of us, & <of[c]> our relation to him & dependence on him, as is so clear & full, as to be sufficient to determine & satisfy our minds. [¶?] And if God looks upon it a thing of great importance that we should exercise that religion that becomes us, & much insists upon it <that [c]> we should; we may determine, that he also looks upon <it[c]> as a thing of great importance, that we should have such clear notice of the<o>se things.
¶But we have sufficient evidence, that it is of great importance, that we should exercise that religion that becomes us; & that our Creatour looks upon it to be so, & does greatly insist upon it next col. e.
_________________________________________________________________
[N.B. To this point at least, the "becomes us" is ea. time a replacement for "is our duty."]
last col. c] [E's] Not only is it necessary that we should know that God is, & what he is, in order to know what that religion <is, [c]> which is our duty is [xo c?]; but also tis requisite that we should know those other things mentiond, viz what concern we have with him &c.
¶If we have no concern with him, nor he with us; if he takes no notice a [xo E] <he [c?]> was [ we? xo c] has no relation to us, & we have no dependence upon him, & he takes no notice of us & concerns himself nothing at all with us; then surely all will allow, that the foundation of religion, consisting in the regard of our minds & exercise of our hearts, & <in [c]> acts of respect or service towards him, do <(at least) [xos,c]> in a very <great [c]> measure cease.
¶Whatever we know of the excellencies of a person in China or India or some distant age, yet if we have no concern with him nor he with us; no service from us to him is properly our duty. there can be no intercourse, nothing to excite the exercises & services of friendship, according to the human /p./ nature. There can be no application of mind to the person. Excellencies in such circumstances do but little to draw forth respect & engage the heart -according to the [xo c] human <nature [c]> such distance and exclusion from all <mutual [c]> concern [1 or 2 words oblit. by c] /mg/ in <are [c]>[is ? xoc] as to influence on the heart, much [? obv. read so by c] /mg/ the <same as [c]> exclusion from reality of existence: as tis in the natural & material T, magnitude and quantity of matter attract but little at an immense distance.
¶The duties proper in creatures one towards another arise from their mutual concern, relations & connections. so it is with respect to our duty to God.
[¶? short line betw. lines of wr.] Supposing it could be & were indeed so, that <a [c]> superiour being of great excellency were the Creatour of some other T, at an immense distance from this, & we knew of it & had notice of his being & excellency; but knew he had no manner of concern with this our creation, & took no notice of us; In how great a degree should we be without the foundation of religion towards such a being.
¶And therefore doubtless in order in order [xo c] to our knowing what that religion is, that is our duty towards God, we must know not only that he exists, & what manner of being he is; but also must know the mutual concern<s [c] which subsist between [c]> he has with [xo c] us &c-- last p. . c.
_________________________________________________________________
¶It is self-evident, that our duty or that which becomes us is <is[c]> [xo by E in order to interline; restored by c] of importance: for that is what is meant by being of importance, viz. being a thing worthy to be regarded, and the opposite of which is worthy to be avoided. But that which is amiable, and the contrary of which is hateful, that [xo c] is worthy to be regarded, & the contrary <to be [c]> avoided. But the very notion of duty a thing becoming of us implies fitness or amiableness, & that the contrary is hateful.
¶And if duty or <a [c?]> becoming temper & behaviour in general be of importance; then the greatest duties, or those that we are most obliged to, are of <great [xoE]> proportionably of [sic] greatest importance.
¶But that we should have respect to God, who is infinitely the greatest & best of beings, & [by c? <whom [c]> on [one? xo c] /mg/ xx <we [c]> [wr. over by c; we? &?] have infinitely the greatest concern with & dependence upon, is the greatest duty, and that which we are under infinitely the greatest obligation to.
¶And as it of so great importance, that we should exercise that religion that is our duty; so we must suppose, that our Creatour looks upon it so, & that tis proportionably agreeable to his will; or in other words it is a thing proportionably [y by c?] fit & amiable in his eyes, that we should do so.
¶That God has regard to men's doing their duty & <is [c]> not careless about it, is evident from these considerations: [¶?] Tis evident, that God is not negligent of the T that he has made. He has made it for his use, & therefore doubtless he uses it: which implies, that he takes care of it, & orders & governs it, that it may be directed to the ends for which he has made it.
¶If G. regards the state of the T, he will especially regard the state of the intelligent part of the T, which is transcendently the most important, & that for which all the rest is evident[ly (mfo)] /p./ made; and without which all the rest is nothing.
¶God regards the moral state of that intelligent T, as its <the [c, over E's word]> [?? oblit. c.] well-being & preservation <of the T [c]> depends upon it<'s [c]> <moral state. [c]> w<W [c]>ickedness tends above all things to ruin it, if let alone it tends to its greatest confusion, & [xoc] disorder & utter destruction, as a fire that will wholly consume it . And its beuty & excellency above all things indeed summarily consists in <in virtue. [c]> [?? wr. over by c]
¶We see that God takes care of the well being, good state, regularity and beauty, of those parts of the T, that are infinitely of less importance. therefore surely he is not careless about these things in the intelligent T, the highest part of the creation, the head of all, that is next to himself.
¶And from what has been said it is evident, that he will not be careless about men's duty to him, or respect to him or to [xo; c?] their religion, which is infinitely the most considerable & important part of his duty. [¶?] God cannot be indifferent about reasonable creature's [sic] respect to him, whether they love or hate him; whether they are his friends or enemies; whether they bless or curse him; whether they fall in with his will & [xo E] <designs> end [xo c] in creating them & the T or set themselves against it, & live in opposition to it; not only as he loves what is beautifull & hates what is hateful, but as he loves himself, loves his own end, [ends?] seeks what he seeks, & is inclined to what he is inclined to.
¶Tis evident that as God has made men [sic] an intelligent creature, capable of knowing his creatour, & discerning God's aims in creation; & particularly in creating himself, by seeing the nature & tendency of things; and has made him a volitive & active creature, capable of willings [sic?] [means willingly ??] & actively, [? c reads "active" & adds comma] falling in with his aims & promoting them. so it must be, that he has made him to serve him, & consequently to have respect to him & love him.
¶See further sermon on Gods moral governmt from Ps. 90 [? 96?] 6---10. [N.B. neither text in Pratt's index]
¶From these things it must needs be, according to what was before laid down, that God looks upon it as of great importance, that men have & exercise that religion that becomes them & <that he [c]> greatly insists upon it. And [xoc] [wwxo E] Therefore it follows from things before observed, that he greatly insists upon it, that men should exercise that respect to him that is agreeable to his nature & perfections, & his concern with us, the relation he stands in to us, & the dependence we have on him.
¶Having established these things, I would now proceed further, /p./ & say, that seeing God so much insists upon it, that we should have & exercise that religion towards him, that becomes his perfections & that concern we have with him & dependence we have upon him; we may well conclude, that he will not deny mankind the means necessary to render them capable of this; And therefore will not deny them the necessary means of some clear, evident & distinct knowledge, not only of his existence & perfection<s,[c]> but also of the relations he stands in to us, & of the things wherein we are dependent on him & in general [governed?] on him: [xo c] seeing that (as has been proved) the religion, that becomes us towards God, depends on these things as their necessary ground, as well as on his existence & perfections. <next col. a next col. d.> If God did not afford necessary means, for the existence & support of that religion, which in his own eyes is most important in the regularity, beauty & order of the T. But from what has been already proved, G. does take care of this, & therefore doubtless will give mankind necessary means for the clear, evident & distinct knowledge of the concern he has with them, & their dependence on him, at least in its more important articles.
______________________________________________________________________________
last col. c.] [E's] In in [sic] order to a proper & necessary [??] foundation & support of the [that?] <on [in?] Gods being> religion founded <perfections &> on our particular relation to God & dependence on his<m [c?]> perfections [xoc?], tis not sufficient that we only have some uncertain conjecture concerning the<o>se things; but that we should have clear notice of 'em, & determining [?], satisfying evidence . s<S[c]>uch is the nature of me<a>n, that <he does not feel [c]> entire friendship & respect does not [xoc] /mg./ towards an object of an uncertainly conjectured existence & excellency, & <who [c]> that we [xo c] <we [? c]> in a doubtful manner conjecture takes notice of us & has such & such concern with us. & [xoc] t<T[c]>herfore tis doubtless agreeable to the will of God, that mankind should have clear & full notice of the things foremention'd; as it must be his will to afford necessary means for the being of that religion in his creature towards <him [c; mg.]> which becomes them. last col. d.
______________________________________________________________________________
as for instance, we may conclude, that he will not deny mankind sufficiently clear & evident knowledge of his concern with them as their Creatour & preserver & the author of all their outward good things, & as their Judge to recompence their behaviour. or if there [are (om.E0] any other relations, that God stands in to them, of like importance, then doubtless it is the will of G. to give like clear & full evidence of them also.
¶But now from these things I infer, that if there be any such thing as forgiveness of sin & salvation from sin & its evil consequences, then God has certainly given a revelation to mankind, to make this clearly & distinctly known, with the terms, method & means of it. Because if so, these things will follow;
¶1. That then God sustains a relation intirely new, & distinct from the natural relation of a Creatour, preserver &c-- viz. that of a Saviour. & we have a new concern <with[c]> of [xoc] God, & a new dependence on him, entirely distinct from that which is by nature, no less important than that, & which renders a new kind of regard to God, and so a new sort of religion, proper & becoming yo be in man, suitable to this new religion <relation[c]> [xoE?] & those our <his [c]> [xo c] new concerns with G. and corresponding there with.
¶2. that we cannot have any clear, certain & distinct knowledge of this new relation &c. ant other way, than by divine revelation. I shall shew each of these in their order.
¶1. If there be any forgiveness of the sin we are guilty of, and deliverance from sin & its consequences; then God stands in a new relation to us, even that of a Saviour, & we have new concerns with him founded upon it. Which new relation is no less important, than that of the Author & preserver of our nature & the bestower of natural enjoyments; and consequents<ly [c]> [sic?] new regards to God, & new duties founded on this new relation, become us, which are no less important, than the duties of natural religion.
¶That the relation of a Saviour from our sin & its consequences is no less important, than the other, will appear from the following considerations.
¶Tis evident that mankind in general have forsaken & renounced the Author & Preserver of their beings, & the Fountain of all that pertains to their will-being; i.e their hearts have forsaken him, in that they dont love God so much as they do other things. therefore they have taken away their hearts from God, have dethroned God in their hearts, & have given <to other things [c]> their hearts to other things [xo c] that belong to God; have set up other things in the throne /p./ throne[sic] of God. They <have[c]> subject<ed[c]> God in their hearts to things that are infinitely mean & worthless & vile in comparison of God. This is attended unavoidably with enmity to God; as rebelling against a lawful prince & setting up another in his stead, is turning enemy to the lawful prince. So men naturally disregard God<'s[c]> glory & supream dominion. they have truly no sincere consent of heart to <yt glory [c]> it [xo c] or delight in any such thing; but rather are against it, and have naturally no relish for the infinite supream beauty of the divine nature, nor any proper gratitude to him, as the fountain of all the [that?] good that belongs to our being. And this certainly is rebellion & revolt & a renouncing & casting off the supream Being, as to his infinite excellency & dignity, & as <to [c?]> that supream dominion of his founded on that dignity, & the relation of a Creatour, Preserver and Fountain of all good.
¶Now tis pretty manifest, that such a forsaking & renouncing <of[c]> the Author of our being & of all good, & thus turning enemy to him, forfeits his favour & friendship, & the benefits we have from this Fountain of good; & that implies that it deserves, that we should be totally undone. a casting off the author of our being deserves plainly, that he should cast us off; that he should be totally undone. a casting off the author of our being deserves plainly, that he should not be for our good. and that [xo c; E?] our being his enemies deserves, that he should be & act as our enemy, & so that he should cause our being to be only for our misery.
¶And if we have deserved these things, then unless we are forgiven, at least in part, these things will come upon us.
¶From these things it appears, that if we are ever forgiven and restored from this utterly ruined & undone state, it will be as great a thing as our creation, and equivalent to a new creation from nothing, in order to a new preservation & new enjoyment of the benefit [-s?] of being. so that hereby God stands in a new relation to us, even that of a Saviour, & we have a new concern with him & dependence upon him, of equal importance with that of /mg/ of our Creatour, Preserver &c. and if our <the [c]> [xo c] misery that we deserve, be worse than a state of non-existence, as it would be easy to prove that it must be infinitely worse, then this new relation of a Saviour is infinitely more important than the other.
¶From whence it follows, that new duties arise, new regards towards God, and a new religion becomes us; which is no less importance [sic] <than natural religion. [c]> & which it is of [ xo E]
¶And it will further follow from things before shown, that it must be agreeable to the word of God, that men <we [c?]> should have means of clear, full [?] & distinct notice of <of [c]> [xoc?] this new /p./ relation that God stands in to us as our Saviour, and his concern with us in that matter, [xo c?] & the manner of our dependence on him in that matter: And consequently, that we have sufficient means for a certain knowledge, that God is willing to forgive us; and of ["of" by c?] the terms on which; and what salvation we may obtain: how far we may be restored to favour; what happiness such sinful creatures may obtain; the way & means of salvation, & the way in which we may obtain an interest in it: In order to know the duties which arise from these things, the regards which become us towards God as our Saviour, & the dispositions & affectations & exercises answerable to the concern we have with God in that affair . As in order to the substinence & support of natural religion, we need clear manifestations of the perfections of God, & clear evidences of our dependence on God in the course of nature & common providence; so in order to the subsisting of the new religion proper to be exercised towards God as our Saviour, we need clear manifestation of the work of salvation & of the manner of the exercise and displays of God's perfections in that work, & our particular dependence on him in that affair. And therefore from what has been before observed, tis doubtless agre<e>able to the will of God, that we should have such clear manifestations & evidences. & if this cant be without a revelation, then tis doubtless the will of God, that we should have a revelation; i.e if there be any such thing as forgiveness & salvation for us. & <there [xo c?]> this is what I would now proceed to shew;
¶2. That we cannot have any certain clear & distinct knowledge of these things concerning our restoration & salvation without a revelation.
¶'Tis said by some, that the light of nature & reason is sufficient to teach us, that a good God stands ready to forgive sinners on their hearty repentance.
¶But I think it plain, that our reason <alone [c]> only [xoc] never [xoc] /p/ never would give us a clear & evident notice of this.
¶A wise governour in governing will not be influenced wholly & only be goodness & pity. W<w?>isdom on many accounts, & in many cases, may prevent his forgiving offenders. & who could tell in what manner wisdom might influence & determine the supream Ruler of the T in this matter? who could tell what ends he might have in view, to induce him not to forgive men, that in the manner before mentiond <had [c]> forsaken & renounced him & wicked [??] enemies to him? and shew mercy to such<(p 9)> [xoc; "p 9" also by E?]
¶We see by fact & experience, that it dont necessarily follow from God's goodness, that he will prevent all misery of his creatures; but that nevertheless his wisdom induces him to order <send upon them [c]> [xo c] innumerable and extreme calamities. --S<s>o that his wisdom causes him not to do every thing, that in it self considered would be an act of goodness & mercy. <Otherwise [c]> If so [xoc] not only would he prevent all misery, but make all his creatures ten thousand times happier than they are, & make ten thousand times happier than they are, & make ten thousand times more creatures to be happy than he does <make. [c]>
¶'Tis natural to suppose, that other things become the supream Governour of the T besides pity & goodness: & particularly that justice & hatred of sin become him. It is not natural to suppose, that he cannot be provoked or offended by injuriousness & an unreasonable spirit & treatment; & particularly by an injurious disposition & behaviour toward[s (? mg; see MO)] himself, in ingratitude enmity & contempt. At least we can't be certain [ line by c] from the light of nature, that he cant be provoked by these things. If we may judge by what seems to be dictated by the hearts of the generality of mankind through the face of the earth & in all ages, tis natural for the mind of man to suppose, that the Deity is greatly provoked by these things.
¶And if he is provoked by sin & does greatly abhor & resent it, tis natural to suppose, that he is disposed to punish it & with severity. This also agrees with the notions of mankind in all ages & nations.
¶And if other perfections besides goodness, such as justice, holiness hatred of sin, & wisdom as it regards the most perfect state of the universal system, in the whole series of events; I say, if such other perfections must have their ends regarded, and so have a hand in determining with respect to offenders, & [xo c?] rebels & enemies, whether they shall be forgiven & recieved to favour; and if any such, how many, & who, & when, & to what degree, & what benefits they shall recieve, and in what way they shall be saved, & by what means, on what terms &c. And [? xo c] how shall it be clearly determined, without a revela-/p./tion , how great a hand <those [c]> other perfections besides goodness, may have in this affair? and how great a regard will be paid to other ends besides the end<s [c]> other perfections besides goodness, may have in this affair? and how great a regard will be paid to other ends besides the end<s [c]> of meer pity & goodness?. How many & various the ends may be, which God in his wisdom may see fit to provide for, and how important they may be in his eyes? Who can tell how far he may think fit to proceed in punishing, to vindicate his own majesty, to maintain his own authority, & the dignity of his government, & to maintain inviolate the grand rule of government? and who can tell what may be best for the system of universal existence, taken in its utmost extent, & with regard tot he whole reason say, that if God be perfectly wise, he will order the methods of his proceeding in the moral government of the T, so as to make provision for the obtaining <of[c]> the best ends om the best manner, meaning by best, [c's line?] that which is so on [im?] an universal & perfect view of all things, in their utmost extent & utmost duration? And how can reason alone fully & clearly determine & satisfy those, who are so infinitely far from being capable of such a view, what is best in this sense?
¶So if we suppose that <it were known & [c]> determined, that tis God's will, <that[c]> there should be some way of salvation; reason will determine, that the method & means, terms & degrees &c-- shall be such, as are wisest & best in the foregoing sense, viz with regard to the influence of each part of the scheme or method of salvation, on the whole extent & duration of existence, comprehending that infinite variety of particular beings, circumstances & events. But who will say, that man's reason alone is sufficient to determine what method of salvation is wisest in this sense? what degree of mercy, what deliverance & happiness, what means of salvation, what terms of enjoying the benefit of it, will have the best & most perfect influence in such a sense?
¶Will any say that man's understanding & reason alone make it certain, that the infinitely wise holy & righteous Governour of the T, stands ready to forgive all offenders, how great however their offence, & how far soever they go in their opposition, rebellion, enmity ingratitude & contempt; & how long soever /p./ they continue in the<o>se things; and how far soever they proceed in acting upon their enmity & contempt? If not, then who shall set the bounds? Can man's reason fix the limits, & say that men may go so far in offending & yet find mercy, & no further?
¶Reason alone cannot certainly determine, that God will not insist on some satisfaction for injuries he recieved. If we consider what have in fact been the general notions of mankind, we shall see cause to think, that the distates of men's minds, who have been without revelation, have been contrariwise; viz that the Deity will insist on some satisfaction. --- Repentance makes some satisfaction for many injuries, that men are guilty of one towards another; because it bears some proportion to the degree of injury. But reason will not certainly determine, that tis proper for God to accept of repentance is infinitely disproportionate [sic] to the heinousness of the the offence, or the degree of injuriousness that is offered.
¶And reason will not certainly determine, that the offence of foresaking & renouncing God in heart, & treating him with such indignity & contempt, as to set him below the meanest & vilest things, is not immensely greater & more heinous, than any injury offered to man; and that therefore all our repentance & sorrow falls infinitely short of a [so c] proportion in measure & degree.
¶If it be said, that we may reasonably conclude & be fully satisfied in it, that a good God will forgive our sin on repentance. I ask, what can be meant by repentance in the case of them that have no love nor true gratitude to God in their hearts, and that have such an habitual disregard & contempt of God in their hearts, as to treat created things of the least value with greater respect of heart, [xo c?] than him? If it be said , that thereby is meant being sorry for the offence, I ask, whether that sorrow is worthy to be accepted as true repentance, that dont arise from any change of heart, or from a better mind, a mind more disposed to love God & honour him, being now so changed as to have less disregard & contempt: whether or no sorrow only from fear & self- love, with a heart still in the same state as to disregard of God, be such as we can be certain will be accepted. If /p./not, how shall a man, who at present has no better heart, but yet is greatly concerned for hims. thro fear, know how to obtain a better heart? How does it appear, that he, if he tries only from fear & self-love, can make his heart better & make hims. love God? What proper tendency can there be in the heart to make it self better, till it sincerely repents of its present badness? And how can the heart have sincerity of repentance of its present badness, till it begins to be better & so begins to forsake its badness by truly disapproving it, from a good disposition or better tendency arising in it? If the disposition remains just the same, then no sincere disapprobation arises; but the reigning disposition approves it self, & that tends nothing to destroy it self, but on the contrary to confirm it self. The heart can have no tendency to make it self better, till it begins to have a better tendency: for therein consists its badness, viz. having no good tendency or inclination. And to begin to have a good tendency; or which is the same thing, to begin to have a sincere tendency or inclination to be better, is the same thing as to begin already to be better.
¶So then [that?] it seems, that they that are not under the reigning power of an evil heart, can have no ability to help thems., how sensible soever they may be of their misery, & concerned thro' fear & self-love to be deliverd; But they need this from God as part of their salvation, viz. that God should give 'em sincere repentance, as well as pardon and deliverance from the evil consequences of sin
¶And how shall they know without revelation, that God will give sinners a better heart, to enable em truly to repent; or in what way they can have any hope to o[b]tain it of him?
¶And if it were so, that men could obtain some sincere repentance of their being wholly without that love of God that they ought to have; yet how can reason determine, that God will forgive their sin, till they wholly [c's line] forsake it? or till their repentance is perfect? till the relinquish all their sinful contempt, ingratitude & regardless<ness [c]> of God? or which is the same thing, till they /p./ fully return to their duty, i.e. to that degree of love, honour, & [xo c] gratitude & devotedness to God, that is their duty? If they have robbed God, who can certainly say that God will forgive them, till they restore all that the whole <all> that they have robbed him of, & give him the whole that he claims by the most absolute right? and if there be ever any instances of it in this T, who will say, that tis in every mans power to obtain it? or that there certainly are no lower terms of forgiveness? and if there are, who can tell certainly where to set the bonds, & say precisely to what degree a man must repent? How great must his sorrow be in proportion to his offences? &c. &c.
¶Or <As?> who can say, how long a man's day of probation shall last? Will reason alone certainly determine, that if a man goes on for a long time, presumptuously in his contempt, rebellion & affronts, presuming on God's goodness, depending that tho he does thus abuse his grace as long as he pleases; yet if he repents at any time, God will forgive him & recieve him to favour, forgiving all his presumptuous aggravated rebellion, ingratitude & provocation; & will recieve him into the arms of his love? Will reason only <alone [c]> [xo c] fully satisfy the mind, that God stands ready to pardon & recieve to favour such a sinner, after long continuance in such horrid presumption & most vile ingratitude? or will reason fully determine as a certain thing, <for a certainty [c]> [xo c] that God will do it, if men thus presumptuously spend their youth, the best part of their lives, in obstinate & ungrateful wickedness, depending that G. will stand ready to pardon afterwards? .--- & in short, how can reason alone be sufficient to set the bounds, & say how long God will bear with & wait upon presumptuous sinners? how many acts of such ingratitude & presumption he will be ready to forgive & on what terms? &c I say, how can reason fix the<o>se limits, with any clear evidence that shall give the mind a fixd establishmt & satisfaction? /p./ Since therefore, of there be any <such [c]> thing as the forgiveness & salvation of sinful ma<e>n, new relations of God to me<a>m & concerns of God with me<a>n, & a new dependence of me<a>n on God, will arise, no less important & probably much more of [xo c] important, than these [xo c] that [xo E] those which are between God & man, as God is his Creatour & the Author of his natural good: and God must manifest his perfections in new displays of them, in a new work of redemption or salvation, contrived or ordered by his infinite wisdom, and executed by his power, in a perfect consistence with his justice & holiness, & a greater [?] manifestation of his goodness, than are <is [c]> [xo c] made in God's works as the Author of nature; so these things must be the foundation of new regards to God, new duties, & a new religion founded on these displays of Gods perfections in the work of salvation, and on the new relations God sustains towards man, & the new dependence of man on God, & new obligations laid on man in that work, which may be called revealed religion, different from that natural religion, which is founded on the works of God as Creatour & the Author of nature, & our concerns with God in that work; tho not at all contrary to it or subversive of it; but in addition to it & <in [c]> perfect agreement with it.
¶The light of nature teaches that religion, that is necessary to continue in the favour of <the[c]> God that made us; but it cannot teach us that religion, that is necessary to our being restored to the favour of God, after we have forfeited it. [finis]
¶1305. See at the end of N. 1300 p. 66. ]* XTIAN RELIGION.
¶ 1306. XTIAN RELIGION It adds to the evidence which is given to the truth of Xtianity, by the multitudes [xo c] of miracles said [? xo c] wrought by X & his apostles & followers in the first century, that there were no pretences of inspiration or miracles among the Jews; at least not <none [c]> [xo c] worth the taking notice of, in Judea or any other part of the T.
¶If all this<at [c]> [the? wr. over by c] multitude & [& by c?] that long continued series of miracles, pretended to be wrought in confirmation of Xtianity, were fictions, vain pretences, or enthusiastic whims & imaginations; why were there no pretences or imagination[s] of the same sort, on the other side among the Jews in opposition to these? those of the Jews that were opposite<ed [c]> [? xo c] <to Christianity, [c]> were vastly the greater part <of the nation. [c]> And they had as high an opinion of the honourableness of those gifts of prophecy & miracles, <as Christians. They [c]> were exceeding<ly [c]> proud & haughty, proud of their special relation to G., & <of [c]> their high privilege as the peculiar favourites of heaven: & in that [this?] respect <were [c]> exalted far above Xtians & all the T: which <is [c]> a temper of mind (as we see abundantly) above all other others [sic] leading men to pretences of that nature, & leading them to the height of enthusiasm.
¶There could be nothing peculiar in the constitution of the first Xtians, arising from a different blood, peculiarly tending in them to enthusiasm, beyond the rest of the Jews. for they were of the same blood, the same race & nation next col. c.
______________________________________________________________________________
¶The true reason therefore why so vast a multitude of miracles were said & believed to be openly wrought among Xtians, for so long a time, even for a whole age, & none among the Jews, must be, that such was the nature & state of things in the T of mankind, especially in that age, that it was not possible to palm false pretences of such a kind upon the T; and that those who were most elated <wh pride & [c]> most ambitious of
______________________________________________________________________________
¶last p. e Nor could it be because they wanted zeal against Xtianity, & desire to oppose and destroy <it; [c]> or wanted for [xic?] envy & great & virulent opposition of mind, to any pretences in the Xtians to excell them in the favour of God, or excellency of any gifts or privileges whatso ever. They had such zeal & such envy even to madness & fury.
______________________________________________________________________________
¶ such an honour, could see no hope of succeeding in any such pretences; and because the Xtians indeed were inspired, & were enabled to work miracles, & did <work [c]> them, as was pretended & believed, in great multitudes, & that continually for so long a time. but G. never favoured their adversaries with such a privilege. [finis]
¶1307 OF PROPHECIES RESPECTING DIFFERENT EVENTS.
¶1308. PROPHECIES OF SS why it is not proper their meaning should be perfectly plain.
¶ 1309. CHRISTIAN RELIGION. DIVINE AUTHORITY OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL.
¶Porphyry would have it, that the book of Daniel was forged after the times of Antiochus Epiphanes. against this the follow[ing (om.E,mg)] things do argue,
¶1. (As Alphonsus Turretinus quoted by Stapferus observes) "That among the whole nation of the Jews, there never was any controversy concerning this matter."
¶This would be exceeding strange if the book had been written so late, as the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, which were <was [c]> [xo c] about 400 years after the Captivity. especially when this book has been recieved into the Jewish canon, as part of the holy SS, and as such read in their synagues; [sic] as their canon has been delivered down from generation to generation. [¶?] It does not appear, that after Malachi's death ever pretended to have the spirit of prophecy among them, or to palm any writing of /mg/ of his own on the people as of divine inspiration. There seems to have been prevailing among them no humour of forgery of any such /p./ kind. And if there had been any such fictitious pretence started after several hundred years entire cessation, tis in the highest degree incredible, that it should be recieved by all the people, & that too at once without any great controversy about the matter, & allowed to be a divine writing. People are apt to be startled & alarmed at new things, that they have been very much unused <to,[c]> claiming an honour far above all that any have pretended for some ages.
¶And especially is it unlikely, that would without much controversy all agree to give this new book a place in the canon of their SS., so long after their canon had been settled & had remaind unaltered & without addition, as being supposed to be finished & sealed up. The canon of holy & divine writings among them was a very sacred thing. That to which they paid a vast regard. and so great an addition, so new made, so long after all the rest, must needs have made a great noise.
¶It is to be observed, that so late as this <there [c]> were among them <a set of men [c]> who made it their business to study & teach their [xo E?] word of God containd in the canon of their Scriptures, containing what they called their law & the prophets: & they had synagogues every where all over the land & in all parts of the T; & every where it was the established custom to read the law & the prophets in their synagogues.
¶Now who can thing<k>, that a gook forged after the times of Antiochus Epiphanes, could have been introduced into this sacred canon, as a divine book, one of the books of their holy prophets, to be kept & read in their synagogues by the whole people through the land of Canaan, & through the whole T, without any remarkable controversy or any memorable [?] noise or ado?
¶It is further to be considered, that this book appears with a pretence of its being written by the Prophet Daniel, in the time of the captivity. In it Daniel speaks of himself as the writer Dan. 8. 1 &c-- & 9. 2. & 10. 11,12. We are told expressly that he wrote his visions, Dan. 7. 12. & that he was commanded to write his prophecies in a book chap. 12. 4. (See Witsius Miscellan. p.254.) and the book is received & put into the Jewish canon under his name. /p./
¶But if this book appear'd first under this pretence, after the times of Antiochus Epiphanes, the whole Jewish nation must know that it was a ne book to them, & that they had never heard of any such book before. Therefore great doubts would most naturally immediately arise in their minds, how it should come to pass, if this book were written in the time of the captivity, by so great a prophet, of such exceeding fame, how <that [c]> [xo c] it should now first appear, & never be heard of till now. It would be strange indeed, if under these circumstances it should be recieved universally all over the T, with such high credit, as to be added to the sacred canon by all, without any remarkable controversy.
¶Surely many strange things must be supposed [d by c?] in the people, to make this credible; and among others This must be supposed, viz. that there was a strange credulous humour in the people as to things of this kind; a fondness for adding to their canon, & an aptitude to recieve any new writing as of sacred authority . But nothing of this appears from any other instance. no other new writing was thus received among them. Tis true, fabulous writings were forged among them; as many strange stories in their apocripha; but never received among them, or any part of them, as part of the canon of their Scriptures.
¶Tis further to be considered, that the Jews were divided into opposite contending sects, who differed greatly among themselves, & had great controversy one with another, & among other things about their canon. The Saducees differed greatly from the Pharisees; & [xo c?] the former admitted only the five books of Moses into their canon; tho they did not deny the other writings to be really written by those whose names they bore. surely these would have made a great noise, if the rest of the Jews had so easily recieved & made so much of a writing so lately forged, especially seeing Dan. 12. 2 is so especially against their most favourite tenet as to a resurrection. This sect at least would have kept alive the remembrance of this folly of the /p./ rest of the Jews.
______________________________________________________________________________
¶The matter of the first finding & receiving this remarkable book & adding it to the canon must have been a famous event among /mg/ and have made a noise on several accounts not only by the controversy raised thereby but as a great & remarkable event in the series /mg/ events attending the state of things amongst them.
______________________________________________________________________________
¶The Samarians also who lived in the midst of the country & were such bitter enemies of the Jews and disliked the writings of the prophets would have been forward to expose such folly of the Jews
______________________________________________________________________________
But that all should be without the least trace or footstep in history, or any remaining account of any such event; but <that [c]> that it [xo c? mg.] The whole affair should presently sink into oblivion, & so universally pass among the people as tho [that?] this book had alwaies been part of their canon, and universally receivd as such even from the time of the captivity, is quite incredible.
¶But thus [this?] it is, <that [c]> no trace of any such event remains; no hint of any time that this book first appeared after the captivity, or of any controversy about its being truly the writing of Daniel; or about its <being [c]> being on an equal footing [etc., xo E] received as a part of the canon, among any that receivd more than the pentateuch; either in any records or writings of the Jews or histories, or monuments of any other nation or sect:. Tho the book be spoken of particularly in very antient writings, as in Josephus, who expressly speaks of this book as received & read among the Jews, as of the most certain & undoubted authority (see Witsii Miscell. p. 254.)
¶This book is spoken of in the evangelists as cited by X, as a part of the Jewish SS. & the Apostle Paul. Heb. 11. chap. [*Interlined as next line. No caret.] & there is [is by c?] no appearance of any controversy about the book in his time. and before that the book of Daniel is plainly refer'd to in the 1 Book of the maccabees, 2. chap. 59 & 60 verses; where the glorious fruit of faith in /p./ Ananias, Mishael & Azarius is spoken <of, [c]> and of Daniel in his preservation from the mouths of the lions.
¶2. The Book of Daniel is extent in the translation of the Seventy; which was made into Greek before the times of Antiochus Epiphanes. See Pool's Synopsis, Prolegomena in hunc libr. p. 1391. .a. [&?]
¶3. Josephus gives an account of this book<'s[c]> being shewn to Alexander the Great, by Jaddua the high priest. So Stapferus, Prideux & Witsius in Miscell. p. 255.
¶4. Stapferus (Tom. II. P. 1081.) observes that if this book had been first as follows "Hoc addimus, quod maximum pondus nobis habere videtur, quod si liber hic post Antiochu Epiphanis demum [?] aetatem fuisset exaratus, fraus subreptionis hujus libri in cannonem sacrum latere nequaquam potuisset, propter nimiam temporis differentiam, quae inter Danielis vitam & prophetiae vel libri hujus editionem, & in canonem receptionem intercessisset: quadringentorem enim circiter annorum apatium tempus hoc complectitur. Quis igitur fingere sibi poterit, seris [?] demum hisce temporibus, librum hunc, & quidem profecticum, praefixo Danielis nomine, rebus maximis in eo contentis jamjam gestis, fraude surrepisse & communi populi Judaici consensu (aliter enim fieri non poterat) in canonem fuisse receptum"
¶5. The greater part of the book is written in genuine Hebrew (see Wits. Miscell. p. 255) and it is not likely, that a book forged 400 years after the Hebrew had ceased to be spoken among the people, would have been so. Other fabulous books, that were written among them after the captivity, were not written in that language.
¶6. Other things no less wonderful, [xo c]?]k are foretold in this book, besides those which came to pass in Antiochus's times, no less wonderful & no less plainly & exactly agreeing with the event, which came to pass in later times: as the prophecies concerning the Roman Empire; & some of them have come to pass many ages since that time; yea many ages Xs time.
¶7. The prophet Ezekiel makes mention of Daniel as one if the most holy men, & <as [c]> most [? xo c?] f [? xo c] one of the greatest & most familiar friends of God, & also <as [c]> one of the wisest men that ever were in the T; Ezek. 14. 14,20 & 28. 3. These things may well lead us to suppose, that he was a great prophet. If he was a great /p./ prophet, it would be strange that none of his prophecies were written in that age, when the prophets, especially all that were of great note, wrote their prophecies. [finis]
¶1310. Xs MIRACLES.
¶1311. MIRACLES wrought in Xs & the Apostles Days.
¶ 1312. XTIAN RELIGION. THE UNREASONABLENESS OF INFIDELITY.
¶1313. XTIAN RELIGION. NECESSITY OF REVELATION. THE KNOWLEDGE OF DEISTS FROM REVELATION.
¶1314. XTIAN RELIGION. How it excells the heathen morality.
¶ 1315. XTIAN RELIGION. THE HISTORY OF THE NEW-TESTAMENT EARLY WRITTEN. Xs PROPHECIES OF THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM &C. WRITTEN BEFORE THE ACCOMPLISHMT.
¶ 1316. XTIAN RELIGION <That [c]> X had the SP. OF PROPHECY THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM was many ways a remarkable testimony<proof [c]>: [xoc]
¶1. He often foretold it with its time & circumstances & consequences; and that great & extraordinary event, in all its dreadful circumstances & great consequences, exactly answered his predictions. and that it did so abundantly proved that he was a true prophet & xxx <that [c]> [xo E?] the word in his mouth that he spake in the name of God, was the truth, & indeed the word of God, & consequently that his doctrine concerning himself was the word of God, or was divine doctrine.
¶And here this is to be observed, that in the other desolations & captivities that had been in Israel, God sent pro-/p./phets to foretell them & forewarn the people of them: especially the prophets Hosea & Amos. and what abundant predictions & forewarnings were given of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans & their captivity into Babilon, by many prophets particularly Isaiah, Micah, Hulda, Habakkuk, Zephania, Jeremiah & ezekiel? Tho that destruction was but a little thing in comparison of<with [c]> [xo c] that which has followed the latter. And therefore 'tis altogether unlikely, that God should send no prophet at all to predict or forewarn the people of this; but that there should be a perfect silence about it, for more than 500 years before it happen'd. But it was not so; the people had a far greater, more remarkable & affecting warning and predictions [sic] of this than the others not by a prophet that spake on earth, but by the prophet of prophets, the great prophet of God, the only begotten Son of GOd, that is the Lord from heaven. p. 94 .
______________________________________________________________________________
¶2. Christ who thus exactly foretold this great event, declared at the same time the reason why God <would [c]> bring such a judgmt; & he declared it should be for their rejection of him, & the contempt & malignity towards him, his gospel & his church: as the prophets who foretold the destruction of Israel & Jerusalem of old, withal declared the reasons of it. and it would be a strange thing, if that which has been far above all others the greatest judgmt that ever God brought on his people Israel, which in its duration has continued much longer than the whole time of their dwelling in the Land of Canaan, should be brought on them without any one to tell them the reason of it, & leave em all this while in the dark about it.
¶And tis reasonable to suppose, that he that was let so particularly & exactly into the secret of the divine will with respect to the event, also was able truly to declare for what reason & end it was brought to pass. But as there was no other forewarning of the event since Daniels time (who intimated that it should be for rejecting the Messiah). but Xs prediction; so no other reason was given but that which he gave, which therefore should be received as the true reason. But if God brought that destruction for not receiving X, how great a testimony of God is this to Xs divine authority? /p./
¶3. Christ foretold this great event, as that which he himself would bring to pass; Luke 19. 27 that it should come by his foresaking them & not protecting them; Matt. 23. 34--39. Luke 13. 34,35. that it should be his curse, represented by his cursing the barron fig-tree; that it should be by his coming; Luke 17. 30 with context & matt. 24. 3. &c--
¶See how the fulfillmt of such a prediction with such a circumstance is often spoken of in the Old T., as an evidence of the divinity of the prediction, & also of the divinity of the prophet. B. 5. N 1044. p. 4, 5. next col. a. See [?] book [? back?] No. 49. 49 [this line by Jr. &/or copyist]
______________________________________________________________________________
see last p. d] [E's] In other respects God made his hand in this last destruction far more visible, both by an extraordinary interposition, in the strange & unusual incidents & circumstances of it, & also in extraordinary signs, than in former destructions forerunners & pressages of it; See B. 5. N. 972 p. 11,12. p. 9.e. 10.a. <See No. 48 [c]> which is another thing that makes it the more incredible, that God should not interpose & manifest himself in this respect also, viz in forewarning of & giving the reasons of it by the Spirit of prophecy. It appears it was the mind of God to give previous notice of it in extraordinary presages in abundance, why then should there be a total silence in God's more usual manner of presignification by prophecy? last p. d.
______________________________________________________________________________
Last col. c] [E's] 4. The circumstances and incidents of this great event were such, as remarkeable [sic] shew'd it to be the mind of God, that the Mosaic dispensation should be abolished; & to shew that God thenceforward <would [c]> have no more regard to the peculiar institutions or promises of it. See B. 5. N. 972. p. 13 <See No. 48 [c]> Besides the consequence in the blooting out the family of Aaron & tribe of Levi, by the confusion of their tribes, & their temple & land being so long in desolation, & the people in dispersion; by which means God has now made it impossible for the rites of that dispensation to be upheld for a much longer time, than ever they were attended; which is a great testimony from heaven, that that dispensation is at an end, & consequently that the Messiah before that had appeared; & that the doctrine of X, in which he taught, that the time was come that men should no more worship in that mountain nor Jerusalem, but should worship God in /p./ spirit & in truth, was the word of God; and <that [c]> that [?] he was the Messiah.
¶5. That the punishmt of the Jews had no many shrew'd [' by c; he reads differently??] marks & signatures [signations? prob.] of the displeasure of God for their despising, evil treating & crucifying Jesus, is another thing that makes this awful event of his divine mission & authority. See B. 5. N. 972. p. 13. & p. 8. e. <see No. 48. [c]>
¶6. That Christ's followers, the Xtians that were in the city, were by a wonderful providence generally delivered being guided by Xs prophetick directions. See B. 5. N. 972. p. 7.d. p. 11.d. <See No. 48.[c]> [finis]
¶ 1317. CHRISTIAN RELIG. X NO IMPOSTER.
¶1318. XTAIN RELIGION THE APOSTLES NOT ENTHUSIASTS.
¶1319. X MIRACLES not performed by human art & sleight of hand.
¶1320. LORDS DAY. That saying of our Saviour to his disciples But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter nor on the sabbath day. (Matt. 24. 20.) is a very great evidence of the Xtian sabbath For tis quite incredible that X here meant that they should pray that they might not be hindred from the usual observation of the Jewish disable and extraordinary a manner and should so greatly testify his displeasure to the Jews for their adhering so strongly to it & making so much of it. Not only was the destruction of Jerusalem a dispensation by which God put a final end to that awful judgmt as to shew remarkably that God poured contempt upon the festivals of that dispensation & its weekly sabbaths in particular [see Miscel B. 5. N 972. p. 13] [E's] Now is it credible that X should direct Xtians at tho to have so great a regard to the Jewish sabbath at that very time which was appointed for the entire abolishing of it & the pouring of contempt of [sic] it and is it credible that he should give such a direction with such circumstances as would tend to lead Xtians to suppose that X had /p./ so great a regard to the strict observation of the Jewish sabbath at that time as particularly to direct em so long beforehand to pray that they might not be interrupted in their observation of it when that was the very time appointed for his utterly abolishing of it and for an extraordinary most visible & publick testimony of his utter disregard of it
¶But tis evident it was the will of X that there should be some sabbath that it was his will his chh should have the most sacred regard to even at that time of his abolishing & most visibly disregarding the Jewish sabbath; and what sabbath can this be but the Xtian sabbath [finis]